Don't Run With Scissors: Young Children's Knowledge of Home Safety Rules
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine 4- to 6-year-old children's knowledge of their parents' home safety rules and to identify predictors of children's home injuries. METHODS: Within the context of an interview, parents completed a home safety questionnaire in which they specified home safety rules, rated their child's compliance with each rule, explained not having rules, reported on maternal supervision, and reported on the frequency of their child's injuries. We evaluated children's knowledge of home safety rules by having them play a home safety game designed for this study. RESULTS: Children spontaneously recalled only about half of their parents' home safety rules. Prompting resulted in their recognition of about 40% more rules. However, children's knowledge scores did not predict the frequency of their injuries. The best predictors of children's injuries were children's compliance with home safety rules and extent of parental supervision. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that interventions to promote young children's safety knowledge will not likely reduce childhood injuries unless children consistently comply with these rules or parents supervise children to ensure compliance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it